1. I endorse the principles of Retraction Watch
"retractions as a window into the scientific process"
2. I'll quote from a previous response posted today on the BMJ:
"I also take it very seriously when evidence does not support statements about an active pharmacological principle, especially when there are serious concerns about the safety and effectiveness of a molecule. The source of the misleading information (e.g., pharmaceutical company, peer-review medical journal, governamental, academic institution, etc) doesn't matter."
3. I'll quote from the previous response to this paper "In this first letter, I prefer to put emphasis on real data of published and unpublished agomelatine studies, allowing numbers to speak for themselves."
4. This paper doesn't meet the quality standards of the BMJ.
Question: any reason not to retract?
Competing interests: I support open data and transparency in research.